Christians who follow Christ (which is the definition of "Christians", isn't it?) and the Word in a serious manner are often thought of as killjoys. We tend to be viewed as intolerant and judgmental, hypocritical and self-righteous. We will stand on the proverbial street corner and decry killing babies and sexual sin and homosexual behavior and "gay marriage" and the like. That is, we are against something. Everything? Maybe. And the truth is if you talk to most genuine, Bible-believing Christians, there is a sense of righteous indignation about much of what's going on these days. We're indignant if not irate about judges overruling the people's vote to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman and we're upset on one hand about the societal embrace of homosexual sin coupled on the other hand with the rejection of traditional Judeo-Christian morality and we're pieved that when we're viewed as morally indignant we're called "haters", "anti-gay", "intolerant", and "judgmental" by people who are haters, anti-Christian, intolerant and judgmental. But the question I want to ask is is this right? No, not them--us. Are we right in our moral outrage?
Using Jesus as our guide, what was Jesus's response to the sin of His day? We know (because it is so often thrown at us) that He spent time with sinners. This is, in fact, true. Jesus "came to seek and to save the lost" (Luke 19:10). When confronted with a woman "caught in adultery", His response wasn't moral indignation. It was "Neither do I condemn you[1]; go, and from now on sin no more." (John 8:11). Jesus is not portrayed in Scripture as a hater, intolerant, judgmental. Indeed, His enemies portrayed Him as "a friend of sinners" (Matt 11:19). (They didn't mean that as a compliment.) Is it possible that our go-to position of righteous indignation is not the best option?
This, of course, is not a complete picture of Jesus's response to sin. Jesus as lover of sinners (not sin, but sinners) is not the whole picture. It is not a warm embrace in view when Jesus twice invaded the Temple with a whip, overturning tables and furiously chasing out money-changers (John 2:15; Matt 21:12). "It is written, 'My house shall be called a house of prayer,' but you make it a den of robbers." (Matt 21:13). Not warm and fuzzy. That is righteous indignation. Jesus's first and continuous message was not "God loves you," but "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." (Matt 4:17). Jesus wasn't very cuddly when He addressed the cities that had rejected Him (Mat 11:21-24). "I tell you that it will be more tolerable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom than for you." Not a warm embrace. And His words to the Pharisees were less than friendly (Matt 23). "Woe" in Jesus's day referred to a curse, not a blessing, and referring to them as "hypocrites", "blind guides", and "whitewashed tombs" wasn't very inclusive, tolerant, or non-judgmental, was it? Apparently, then, His tolerance and non-judgmental attitude was limited and not the only option.
Jesus had one other response to the sin of His day. It is hinted at in John 11 where we find the Bible-memorizers' favorite verse, "Jesus wept." (John 11:35). Why did He weep? I mean, He knew what He was about to do. He was about to raise Lazarus from the dead. What's to weep about? But it is not the only place. In Luke 19 Jesus weeps over Jerusalem. "Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes." (Luke 19:41-44). Grief. Grief over sin and the lost. Good grief. Oh, wait! That's where I started, isn't it? Grief is good when it grieves the genuine loss that sin brings, when it recognizes the pain that sin causes, when it is the result of compassion. That's good grief.
It would appear that we have more than one Christian response to sin in our world. There is the need to reach the lost and to do so with tenderness. There is the need to confront sin and to do so with righteous indignation. And there is the need to grieve over sin and the pain it causes. Good grief. In your indignation with the homosexual, have you loved them? In your moral outrage, have you grieved for them? All three are valid and necessary.
There is, however, one very important point I'd like to make here. Before you ever rouse that moral outrage, that righteous indignation over the sin of the homosexual, before you ever embrace that sinner, before you ever weep over their sin, you had better have dealt with and be dealing with your own. We don't come to a sinful world sinless. We don't come to the sexually immoral without our own sexual immorality. We don't come to the unbeliever without ourselves having failed to believe. We are not morally superior. We are simply forgiven. It is good to be passionate about God's glory and concerned about those who fall short of it. It is excellent to pursue sinners with the Gospel. It is wonderful to grieve about sin. That is good grief. But grieve first about your own. Begin first with "Lord, be merciful to me, a sinner." (Luke 18:13). Deal first with your own sins. Jesus said that, too (Matt 7:1-5).
________
[1] Very important. When Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you", He was not denying the sin of adultery or excusing sin. (We can be sure of this because He says, "Go and sin no more.") What He was saying was "I am not going to carry out the penalty of the sin in this case." Perhaps it was because the case was sketchy (Where was the guy in all this if they were "caught in the act"?) or maybe it was because He was not in the position at that time to carry out the God-given punishment or maybe it was because He was simply showing mercy at the time, but what He was not doing was ignoring sin. See Matt 5:19 for His view on annulling God's commandments.
No comments:
Post a Comment